I don't precisely recall when it was that I made it to bed, but it was likely ahead of midnight ─ Mark was peacefully unconscious in his comfy chair.

My first break in sleep was probably around 4:15 a.m., and I finally rose around 7:15 a.m. My big plan for the day was a hike to resupply myself with beer later in the morning.

And such a sunny day for it!

Naturally, I first worked upon the post I planned to publish today at my website Latin Impressions. I had begun the post yesterday, so it was essential I publish it today ─ I cannot imagine taking three days to finish a single post.

I got a later start on the two-mile hike to the government liquor store (over at King George Boulevard & 108th Avenue) in Whalley than I intended, but it was still comfortably ahead of 11:00 a.m.

I took my time, for I was not feeling too vigorous; but I also wanted to be exposed to the sunshine for best benefit, maintaining that healthy-looking colouring of my face and shaven head.

Apart from the exercise and the success of the four-mile round-trip hike, the outing was uneventful.

I arrived home to find Mark out on the backyard sundeck soaking up some sunshine, so I ventured out and spent a further 20 minutes doing the same. If I had not, I would have needed to lie down ─ the physical crash that generally attends the burden of bearing two dozen cans of beer a distance of two miles is common to me.

Only afterwards did I resume work on the Latin Impressions post titled Rock Crystal II. I was able to attend it for a couple of hours until it was ready for publishing, and then I did lie down for a time. Mark had gone for the remainder of the day by then.

I never napped ─ I just needed to ease my strained eyes and my aching, stiff body before turning my attention to a post here.

That hike and the effort of bearing the two dozen cans of beer home are all the exercise I shall be undertaking this day.

ﺪﺪﺪﺪﺪﺪﺪﺪﺪﺪﺪﺪﺪ

When I see news reports quoting 'mouth-piece' medical authorities as saying that the anti-vaccinators are misguided and misinformed, I feel an immediate rise of indignation.

These authorities trot out the same old lies about there being no basis for associations with things like autism as if those statements they are spouting are in fact truisms.

One of the best articles I have read recently that treats of this mainstream dismissal of those of us who dare to feel vaccines can be unsafe was published just three days ago by the Health Sciences Institute (HSI) in a report they made concerning the California Medical Association (CMA).

Please have a look at it:

Cheap shot

When it comes to health legislation, the California Medical Association usually gets what it wants.

CMA has been around nearly 160 years. It represents doctors in every pocket of the state.

And it claims it was founded to develop "scientific truths" for the "protection of public health."

But lately CMA hasn't been too interested in your health -- or the truth.

Because right now, a tyrannical piece of vaccine legislation is wending its way through the California state legislature. It's a direct assault on the medical freedoms of millions of California parents and their kids.

And CMA is proving that it's not above bending the truth to make sure you never get to decide which vaccines are appropriate -- or safe -- for your kids again.

It's called Senate Bill 277.

And this dictatorial measure would strip California parents of any say in what shots their kids will receive. Religious and philosophical objections would be tossed right out the window.

Vaccines would be forced on children or they would be denied an education in public or private school. They would even be barred from daycare!

As you can imagine, parents are up in arms over this. Several doctors even started speaking out, telling the truth about vaccines.

And that's when CMA stepped in. Through its I Heart Immunity front group, it released a "myths vs. facts" sheet meant to give skeptical politicians and citizens the hard sell on vaccines and SB 277.

It was also meant to make opponents of mandatory vaccinations look like misinformed nitwits.

But when I checked those "facts" CMA released, I saw that it's the association that's spreading misinformation like wildfire.

To be polite, we could say that CMA is confused or doesn't know the real story. But I think this goes way beyond that -- and I'm pretty sure you'll agree.

For example, CMA says that it's a myth that there is any link whatsoever "between vaccines and autism."

Of course, we know that's NOT TRUE.

There are (at the least) six known cases where the federal government has admitted that vaccines have triggered autism in children -- and the feds have given millions of dollars to the families of these kids to pay for their care.

Just last year another study was published that found autism rates significantly jumped each time another vaccine made with fetal cell lines (more on that in a minute) was introduced.

And over the years there have been many peer-reviewed, published studies showing a possible link between vaccines and autism.

CMA also says that it's a myth that getting a vaccine can cause you to "shed" a virus and infect others. It says that "there are no vaccines in use today that have been shown to ‘shed' and get other people sick."

That's also NOT TRUE

The Merck label for its shingles shot says right on it that "transmission of vaccine virus may occur."

And the Merck label for its chicken pox shot for kids also says that there is a threat of "possible transmission" of the "vaccine virus."

On top of that, St. Jude Children's Hospital and Johns Hopkins warn that anyone who has received a live vaccine, such as the MMR, smallpox, chickenpox or nasal flu spray can pose a danger to someone whose who is ill and receiving treatments. If you have received one of those shots, they ask you not to visit.

Sadly, that's also NOT TRUE. That's a dark side to vaccines that groups like CMA work to cover up at any price.

The real truth is that fetal cell lines are used to make some vaccines. These vaccines not only contain residual components of those fetal cells, but also the DNA and protein.

And that's something even Big Pharma's trade association admits. In fact, it said that those cells might actually be necessary to "make the vaccine effective."

The fact is, CMA is a political group with a long history of pushing a mandatory vaccination agenda. CMA brags about being a driving force behind mandatory school vaccines in the 1880s -- and if you think some of today's vaccines are dangerous, you should have seen them back then.

And now, CMA and groups like it are lining up behind a bill that would force you to hand over your personal freedoms to the mainstream medical establishment.

Also about three days ago, the Health Sciences Institute (HSI) published a report spotlighting just who is behind the recent public smears of popular 'Dr. Oz.'

I don't follow Dr. Oz, but I do believe that he is well-intentioned and generally doing a great public service.

Anyway, here is the report by the Health Sciences Institute:

When you play with fire, you're going to get burned. And you can bet television's Dr. Mehmet Oz saw this burn coming a mile away.

He's been speaking out about the powerful genetically modified food industry. He's been supporting labeling and your right to know what's in your food.

And it looks like he's now the victim of a smear campaign by a GM industry trying to silence one of its loudest -- and most famous -- critics.

You may have heard that a small group of "prominent doctors" signed off on a letter asking Columbia University to remove Dr. Oz from its faculty. And if you follow the GM foods debate closely, some of the names on that letter probably rang a bell.

One of the authors was Dr. Gilbert Ross. And he's not just prominent for having served time at a Pennsylvania prison for Medicaid fraud -- he's also acting president of the American Council on Science and Health.

ACSH has defended asbestos, pesticides, and even Agent Orange, which poisoned our Vietnam vets. And ACSH's latest mega-paying gig is promoting GM food and beating back its biggest threats -- like labeling -- any way it can.

One of the other names on the letter was Dr. Henry I. Miller, a former ACSH trustee who has spent a career defending the GM industry. He was the medical reviewer at the FDA for the very first GM drugs. And he helped fast-track the licensing of GM insulin and human growth hormone.

For groups like ACSH -- and their attack dog doctors like Ross and Miller -- Dr. Oz is public enemy number one. Dr. Oz reaches millions and for some time now he's been sounding the alarm about GM foods covered in dangerous herbicides like Roundup.

Dr. Oz supports GM food labeling, saying "you have the right to know what's in your food." But that's a right Big Food is never going to hand us without a fight.

Make no mistake about it. The campaign to discredit Dr. Oz is about silencing opposition to GM foods. It's about powerful, billion-dollar bullies trying to muzzle free speech.

And that's something we all need to stand up against -- whether you're a fan of Dr. Oz or not.

I will finish this section with two reports from Dr. William Campbell Douglass II, both of which relate to breast cancer. He published these about three days ago.

Paranoid push for MORE mammograms puts women in danger

In all my years of medical practice, the only disease I couldn't treat was hypochondria.

We all have hypochondriacs in our lives, and I saw plenty in my office -- folks who thought every sniffle was pneumonia and every cough needed a chest X-ray.

And I had to tell lots of these folks that no doctor worth his salt orders dangerous and expensive tests based on nothing but paranoia.

That's just common sense. But when it comes to breast cancer, our government is asking thousands of doctors to toss logic right out the window.

New guidelines say women can get radiation-packed mammograms pretty much whenever they want... even when they're NOT medically necessary!

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force admits mammograms are unnecessary for women between the ages of 40 and 50 and recommends them every two years for older women (and even that's unnecessary, if you ask me).

But they've just caved under pressure from the Pink Ribbon Mafia with a "clarification" that allows women to get annual mammograms from the age of 40 anyway if they're worried about the disease.

And with all the breast cancer propaganda out there, who isn't worried? Even men are worried about their breasts these days!

The Task Force claims this is about easing stress over cancer fears. These boobs haven't figured out that a false positive is even more stressful -- and can lead to more tests, more screenings, more worry and even invasive biopsies and other procedures.

That biopsy can rupture what had been a contained and harmless tumor, sending cancer cells into the blood stream -- which is why a study found that women with breast cancer who have needle biopsies are 50 percent more likely to suffer cancer of the lymphatic nodes in their years later.

I don't know about you, but I'd take the stress that comes from not knowing --because when it comes to breast cancer, what you don't know usually won't hurt you.

Most tumors are harmless and need no treatment at all. Want to know what makes them harmful? Crushing them in a mammogram machine, causing the tumor to burst and the cancer cells to spread... and then, just for good measure, shooting cancer-causing radiation at it every year.

You may not have cancer the first time you go in for a mammogram. But keep getting those screenings, and you're bound to have it sooner or later!

So don't give into the fear and bullying. The best time to get a mammogram is never. And if you want to cut your risk of breast cancer, I've got something simple you can do coming up next.

Keep reading!

Keep the coffee coming for better breast health

Isn't it funny how often the stuff they keep swearing is "bad" for us turns out to be good?

The same nicotine the know-it-alls claim causes cancer is now being looked at as the next great cure for brain diseases. The booze that was once flat-out banned by a Constitutional amendment can prevent heart disease, dementia and more.

And the caffeine you've been told to limit or even avoid altogether just might be one of the most potent cancer-fighters around, especially for women.

That's right, ladies. Pour yourself a big mug of hot fresh coffee, because new research confirms that coffee in general, and caffeine in particular, has the power to save your ta-tas.

If you haven't had breast cancer, coffee can help prevent it. And if you have had it... if you have it right now... then pour yourself a second mug, because that extra cuppa joe could make sure your cancer never returns.

The study in the journal Clinical Cancer Research finds that the caffeine and caffeic acid found in coffee switch off the signaling pathways that cancer cells need to grow.

As a result, women with breast cancer who down at least two cups of coffee per day have smaller tumors and are less likely to have hormone-dependent tumors than women who drink little to no coffee.

More importantly, they're half as likely to see their cancer return for a refill.

All of the women in the study had been on tamoxifen, a poisonous drug foisted on vulnerable women with breast cancer -- women who don't realize that the very drug that's supposed to fight their breast cancer can CAUSE uterine cancer.

This isn't one of those "needs more investigation" risks, either. The American Cancer Society actually lists this drug as a known carcinogen... but the mainstream has been pushing it as if they're on commission (and who knows, maybe they are).

So of course, the researchers behind the study claim that coffee should only be used WITH tamoxifen, that it might enhance the drug's effects.

HOGWASH!

You can't "enhance" an effect that doesn't exist. And in tamoxifen's case, it doesn't exist -- because studies show it doesn't extend survival by a single minute.

So do yourself a favor: If you're fighting cancer... if you've BEATEN cancer and want to make sure it doesn't return... skip the drug and stick with the mug.

With a brew for you,

William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.

I didn't have the time to ferret out whatever study Dr. Douglass referred to in the first report ─ the study indicating that needle biopsies of breast cancers increase by 50% the odds of later developing lymph node cancer.

Now to close with a short entry from my journal of 41 years ago when I was living for the month of May in a cheap housekeeping room in New Westminster.

I was distinctly unhappy with having to live in that room, so it was a pure blessing that my mother Irene Dorosh and her husband Alex left on a trip to somewhere and gave me their house-keys at the end of the previous week.

Thus, I was spending most of my time at their place out in Surrey. The house no longer exists, but its address was 12106 - 90th Avenue.

THURSDAY, May 9, 1974

I stayed inside all day.

Cathy phoned to see if I still wanted her to drive me to Guildford; I spared her, saying I'd use Bill tomorrow. She is going to pick me up the morrow morning on her way to work and drop me off. I phoned Guildford in the eve; no dumbbells. Bill phoned, so I mentioned this.

"Cathy" was my younger brother Mark's girlfriend, Catherine Jeanette Gunther. The two lived together in a rented home in Whalley.

She had picked me up in New Westminster the day before when she was on her way home from work ─ she worked at Scott Paper in New Westminster.

I had hiked in to New Westminster from my mother's home, partly in an aborted mission to find some set of advertised dumbbells at Eaton's ─ a branch of the department store that no longer exists in New Westminster. I found myself too burned out that afternoon to hike back to my mother's home, and was overjoyed when Jeanette (as "Cathy" preferred to be called) noticed me sitting on a bench debating my dilemma with myself.

Apparently I was intent on trying the Eaton's branch at Guildford in Surrey, but that was a trip not to be made (as I explain in that brief journal entry).

My old friend William Alan Gill lived in a room in New Westminster ─ a better room than the one I had, for Bill worked full-time and could afford it.

So neither Jeanette nor Bill would need to be driving me off to Guildford the following day ─ the advertised dumbbells were just not available locally.

By the way, I am uncertain if there is an Eaton's at Guildford anymore, either. I think it is long-gone, too.

And so much for blogging today! A quick bath...and then a few beers while I watch some T.V. ─ it is 7:55 p.m. as I type this.